SUSHIL KUMAR LITAURIA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I. M. Quddusi, J. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A. G. A.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that a First Information Report was lodged on 10-10-96 at 4 p. m. by one Yogendra Pal Sharma Sub-Registrar, Moth against the accused Saheb Singh and another which was registered in P. S. Moth, district Jhansi as Case Crime No. . . . . . . . . . 86, under Sec tions 419, 467,468, IPC. THEreafter, after completion of the investigation the Inves tigating Officer filed a Charge-sheet which was registered as case No. 391/89, under Sections 467, 468, 419, IPC in which the applicant was shown as informant and Saheb Singh and Puran Singh were ac cused. THE role of the applicant was that he was drafter of the deed in the name of Hari Babu son of Laxmi Narain and Saheb Singh son of Puran Singh. THE witness shown in the said deed was Gulab Singh son of Mahrab Singh and the said deed was made in favour of one Puran Singh son of Panna and Saheb Singh tried to get the same registered.

(3.) IN the result, the present petition stands allowed. Petition allowed. .